Suzuki Fronx vs Kia Stinger

What's the difference?

If you’re considering a small car, particularly if an SUV is the goal, a Suzuki should in most cases be on the shopping list. Back-to-basics motoring is key to the brand’s identity. Its most popular model is a tiny ladder-frame 4X4, for example. Hi Jimny.

The Fronx doesn’t break new ground in any practical sense, but it does come in with a decent price and list of features that should sway plenty of small-car fans in the showroom.

It’s decent to look at, comfortable for the segment, and easy to get used to and drive. The numerical rating on this review betrays just how likeable the car is.

It’s not extremely refined and it starts to lose its dynamic shine on rough roads, but in an urban setting the Fronx should excel.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with meals provided.

The Stinger GT-Line is a great machine. It looks good, feels good to drive and while it's not the cheapest large sedan, it's also not a Camry. With a strong European vibe, it's a nice bridge between boring-dependable and out-of-reach European. Boasting a strong link to Europe in its chassis DNA, it has it all apart, maybe, from the badge.

But Kia has a habit of doing unexpected things and the Stinger was a bold move worth making just for the halo effect of having such a cool car in the range. It has done good things for the company's reputation, as though the rest of the range isn't proof already.

‘Fronx’ as a name doesn’t exactly scream ‘cute’, but the little SUV has a pretty classically Suzuki design. This is not a complaint at all.

The Fronx is 3995mm long, 1765mm wide and 1550mm tall, but despite its diminutive dimensions the brand has opted to lean into a ‘coupe’ style with a sloping roofline that creates a relatively sporty look, especially for something with a two-digit power figure.

So while some of Suzuki’s designs have been divisive in Australia (Ignis, anyone?) the Fronx takes a slightly more conservative approach by leaning into more design trends than just the coupe-back SUV shape. 

For example, its tail-lights span the width of the tailgate rather than simply flanking the boot as was standard for decades.

The LED daytime running lights at the front are also arranged in a slim, high-up position with a set of headlights below.

Inside is arguably more conservative than out, as the Fronx goes with a fairly standard formula in terms of its layout, with few premium materials (the synthetic leather on the seats feels cheap for example) or adventurous design elements to be found.

But that’s not such a bad thing.

The Stinger looks fantastic. I know the car has its detractors, but there's a massive Euro influence here that sits well in my visual cortex. It's maybe not as ooh-aah as the A5 or the outgoing BMW 4 Series Gran Coupe, but the Stinger can and should be mentioned in the same breath. It looks terrific, even if it is a bit fussier in the details.

From the signature grille, the low beltline, big wheels and sports coupe roofline, it looks sleek and sophisticated. 

Inside is a bit more conventional, with some real classic touches such as circular air vents, conventional-looking gear selector and a flat-bottomed steering wheel. It's cool, clean and, with the big new screen, a bit more techy-looking than before. There are lots of nice materials and the odd rogue one, but it's a good cabin that feels well put-together.

Because for all the conservative, even outdated, styling in the cabin, the fact is it’ll be refreshingly familiar to someone who’s getting out of a car from perhaps even before the year 2000.

Suzuki’s place at the budget end of the new-car market means its customers are likely either quite young and buying their first new car, or relatively old and looking for a cheap, rarely used runabout as the ‘last car’.

For the former, a lack of techy distractions is paramount. For the latter, ease of use wins over cutting-edge tech in most cases. Which is why it’s probably okay that the Fronx’s multimedia touchscreen and software wouldn’t feel out of place almost a decade ago.

It can be a tad fiddly to use at speed, but it’s still more straightforward than the ‘iPad-like’ systems Tesla has made popular, and there are physical controls for important functions like climate control.

There’s also a row of ever-present haptic buttons for volume controls and navigation shortcuts.

The ergonomics of the interior are quite basic, but there are no red flags in terms of visibility, reach, or placement. 

The head-up display is a bonus, but the physical dials on the dash rather than a digital driver display are clear enough, despite again feeling nabbed from a time before head-up displays even existed. 

Space for the front passengers is decent, it’s not cavernous but it’s far from cramped. Elbow rests and seating positions allow for a relaxed ride.

The back seat is a slightly less comfortable place, but at 178cm I can sit behind my own seating position without my knees touching the seat in front, and my head has just enough space above to accommodate the top of a mullet.

Behind that, luggage capacity in the boot is 304 litres, or 605 litres with the rear 60/40 split seats folded.

There’s also no space-saver spare tyre, just a repair kit as standard.

This is really a four-seater car. While there is good legroom in the rear, the falling roofline, small door aperture and huge transmission tunnel box you in a bit, almost rendering the middle seat useless for all but the shortest of folks. You do get your own air vents, though, which is generous.

The low roof also means limited headroom, made a little worse by the standard sunroof. I had room but taller people might brush the headlining. There are two cupholders front and rear for a total of four and each door has a bottle holder.

The boot is a modest-for-this-size 406 litres, rising to 1114 litres with the seats down. Access to the boot is good if not spectacular; the hatch opens wide but a slightly narrow aperture means loading and stowing flat packs and things like that could be a struggle.

As is the custom at this time of the year, the Stinger scored a mild update for that minty-fresh taste at the dealer. Not much has changed in the looks department (good) and the most obvious tweak is the brand-spanking new media system already seen in the brilliant new Sorento.

The GT-Line is one of two four-cylinder variants of the Stinger, priced at $57,230 or $60,690 driveaway, a solid $7000 more than the 200S and it's $730 more than the MY20. It's also uncomfortably close to the 330S, which has the delicious twin-turbo V6, but obviously a lower equipment level.

For your money you get 19-inch alloy wheels, a 15-speaker stereo, dual-zone climate control, camera package that includes a reversing camera, side cameras and front camera, keyless entry and start, front and rear parking sensors, active cruise control, powered heated and ventilated front seats, sat nav, automatic LED headlights, head up display, leather seats and wheel and even more besides. It's a lot, which is fair given the price.

The 15-speaker stereo is run by the excellent new media system on the excellent new 10.25-inch touchscreen. It's great to look at, has some really cool ideas in it (including the hilarious soundscapes list which includes, for some reason, a noisy cafe environment), DAB and Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

The Fronx is powered by a 1.5-litre four-cylinder engine with mild-hybrid assistance, driving the front wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission. 

Its outputs are quoted at 76kW and 137Nm, not exactly high-grade stuff and part of the reason the Fronx feels like it takes more than 10 seconds to hit 100km/h.

Under the GT-Line's bonnet is Kia's Theta II 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbocharged engine. It's the same as before, with a stout 182kW and 353Nm. Driving the rear wheels is an eight-speed automatic from the Hyundai-Kia empire.

It's pretty rapid, knocking out the 0-100km/h spring in just six seconds, a mere 1.1 seconds slower than its faster sibling's 4.9 for the benchmark.

Suzuki claims fuel consumption at 4.9L/100km. With its 37-litre fuel tank, the Fronx should be able to manage more than 600km on a single tank, though theoretically its maximum range given its claimed fuel efficiency is 755km.

Kia's claimed combined cycle figure is 8.8L/100km. As the Stinger goes without trickery like stop-start or mild hybridness, it's no surprise that my week with it yielded an indicated 10.4L/100km, which isn't bad for a 1750kg sports sedan that was not molly-coddled and also spent some time in a resurgent case of crap traffic in Sydney.

It also drinks standard unleaded, which is a nice touch.

How you plan to use the Fronx will make a big difference in whether what you’re about to read is a good thing or not. 

The Fronx is a light SUV for a start, so expecting brilliant handling, effortless acceleration and a dead-quiet cabin is going to mean you’re disappointed.

But if you want something easy, engaging and fun, the Fronx might work for you.

Our brief test loop wasn’t entirely indicative of what the Fronx is likely to face day-to-day. With limited time and no preset drive program, the roads within a 20-or-so minute drive of Nagambie, Victoria had to suffice.

The Fronx fared well on the average road, it turned out, with the 1064kg Suzuki managing to feel planted enough to hurl along 100km/h back-roads without complaints. It rides on the same platform used recently by the Suzuki Baleno, something I’ll admit to not having driven.

The rougher roads didn’t faze the light SUV too much, though consistently uneven surfaces made it feel unsettled in some cornering.

Its steering and suspension give enough feedback to make the right inputs easily, though the nature of its light weight and minimal accoutrement in terms of driver assistance make the Fronx feel very rudimentary from the driver’s seat.

At low speeds around the centre of town, the Fronx manages the state’s terrible roads well, though taking off from intersections can be laborious. Much like overtaking, the drivetrain will complain.

And don’t expect its mild hybrid system to do a lot in the way of hard work - or any work at all, really. You could take the hybrid badge off the car, let someone have a drive, and they’d be none the wiser.

From the limited observations on the launch, the Fronx would feel best at home in suburbia or a metropolitan centre more so than on the Hume Highway or the towns dotted alongside it.

Essentially, this is not a refined road trip car for the highway, but its no-fuss approach to getting around means you shouldn’t be surprised if you start seeing them in the car parks at universities or bowls clubs.

I have driven and loved the Stinger GT. It's tremendous fun, goes like a rat running away from a cut snake, which itself is being chased by a mongoose with its bottom on fire, and it handles like a proper sports sedan.

The GT-Line is obviously not that quick, but it's not slow, either. But it does take a bit of the GT's DNA and delivers a driving experience eerily reminiscent of an E90 BMW 3 Series. That seems like an out-of-date reference, but it was a beautiful car to drive with a lovely balance of ride and handling.

The steering has good feel and you know what's going on underneath the front wheels. You sit towards the centre of the car, also a BMW trademark. Turn the wheel and the car goes with you, despite its bulk, and it's happy to dance a bit with its limited-slip diff.

The 2.0-litre turbo does a good job in most conditions but you feel it coming up short when you're hustling it. It's never breathless, but the torque deficit to the turbo six is clear. If you've not driven the faster Stinger, you may not notice, but there's a touch of lag in the 2.0 that contributes to the idea it's working hard to move the big sedan.

But back off a little and it becomes a fluid, fun drive. In town it's firm but very comfortable, gently bumping rather than crashing into potholes. The rear suspension is a complicated five-link set-up that costs money and eats into boot space but delivers the goods.

Given its length the Stinger is a bit tough to manoeuvre in tight spaces and its 11.2m turning circle isn't too flash either, but you soon get used to it.

The Stinger ships with an impressive safety package that includes seven airbags, ABS, stability and traction controls, high- and low-speed forward AEB with pedestrian and cyclist detection, intersection assist, lane-keep assist, steering assist, driver attention alert, high- and low-speed forward collision warning, front cross traffic alert and rear cross traffic alert.

You get two ISOFIX points and three top-tether anchors.

The Stinger scored five ANCAP stars in 2017.

Suzuki has a five-year, unlimited kilometre warranty for its new cars, which is a little behind the curve compared to many budget-friendly brands these days. 

Suzuki does have a five-year servicing schedule, with intervals every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever comes first. Total cost is $2005 over the five years, with services averaging $401, which is not particularly cheap.

Kia's ground-breaking seven year/unlimited kilometre warranty along with roadside assist for the first 12 months. Each time you service your car at Kia, you get an extension on your roadside assist for up to eight years.

Perhaps the only thing that makes you go, "Oh, what?" about the Stinger is the 12 months (Good)/10,000km (Oh...) service intervals. That's pretty common with Kia's turbo engines but is a little inconvenient. Then there's the cost - prices range from $312 to $685, which adds up to $3459 over the first seven services. If you stay under 10,000km/year, that's not bad going at under $500 per year for servicing, but if you're a high-miler, it will add up.

The servicing isn't outrageous - and the prices are capped - but it's not cheap, either.